Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Willowburn FC

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Willowburn FC

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-professional football club of unclear notability. League they play for does not have its own article. Contested prod. ... discospinster _talk 13:28, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom; does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NFOOTBALL. - Jorgath (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for your concern; not sure how this club is any different to Kangaroo Point Rovers, Newmarket, Beenleigh, Brisbane Force, Ipswich City, Ipswich Knights, Mitchelton FC, Pine Rivers United, Rocklea United, Slacks Creek, Toowoomba Raiders, Western Spirit etc, which are all similar style clubs and have their own pages. Is the key issue here that Football Toowoomba does not have its own page, and if so, should we set this up first? - Yonobarn (talk) 22:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Also there are plenty of news links eg http://www.warwickdailynews.com.au/story/2011/05/10/wolves-howling/ http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2010/09/11/willowburn-high-premiership-decider-south-hawks/ http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2011/02/11/martin-to-start-magpie-turnaround-toowoomba/ http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2010/05/29/soccer-sides-hunt-win-in-cup-clash/ http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2010/04/21/rovers-secure-victory-soccer-fixtures-usq/ http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2010/03/31/warwick-hits-back-from-deficit/ - Yonobarn (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi, Yonobarn, and welcome. To clarify, the problem here is that Wikipedia has certain policies concerning what subjects are "notable" enough to warrant their own article, which is called the General Notability Guideline or WP:GNG for short. Over the history of Wikipedia, some subject areas have been given more specific guidelines for notability, including various sports. The one for association football (the sport also known as soccer) is found at WP:NFOOTBALL. The critical point for it is that, in general, only teams in fully professional leagues are notable enough for inclusion, unless they have some other sort of notability (being the first team in that sport in the country might do it, for an example). We other editors can't evaluate easily whether Willowburn FC is in a fully professional league without knowing anything about the league, so information on Football Toowoomba might help. If it's an amateur or semi-professional league, however, we might still need to delete the team page. If you have a lot of reliable-source references, though, the league page might be able to stand on its own, and include a section on the teams with a short blurb paragraph about each one. Still, we need more information. - Jorgath (talk) 03:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Nick-D (talk) 07:23, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- "The critical point for it is that, in general, only teams in fully professional leagues are notable enough for inclusion" - that's simply not true. Players have to have played in a fully professional league to merit an article, but there is no such requirement for teams, in fact WP:NFOOTBALL, which you mention, only refers to players, managers and referees and makes no mention of teams...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- (Edit conflict):My bad, you're right, and I'm sorry. Am very tired. All right, then, WP:NFOOTBALL doesn't apply. Does anything more specific than WP:GNG? Maybe WP:ORG? - Jorgath (talk) 08:59, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. Run-of-the-mill sports reports don't count. Giant Snowman 08:57, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable team. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:02, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Doctorhawkes (talk) 23:29, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete no evidence of meeting any notability guideline. LibStar (talk) 20:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.